How to fix Human Caused Global Warming.

[Toddsterpatriot]

25 MPG vs 16 MPG. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Also, didn't like the last website? Try this one.

news.umich.edu › fuel-efficiency-of-vehicles-onFuel efficiency of vehicles on the road: Little progress ...

Thanks for the link.

From 1991 to 2006, fuel efficiency increased by less than 2 percent, compared with a 42 percent increase in mpg between 1973 and 1991.

More than a 40% improvement between 1973 and 2006, but 1908 is still more efficient. DURR.

 

[Woodznutz]

Well we know what is causing it. All we need to do is reverse what is causing it.

We have to do it in a way that doesn't cause yet more problems.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I wish someone could explain to a regular guy what all this is all about. It's getting so confusing now. Everyone seems to think that everythign is going to happen.

Is there any straight-forward source of information on this???

These Scientists Are Sterile Vindictive Nerds

Try to free your mind of everything the self-appointed authorities tell you. Their college education is a fraud that only teaches them to feel superior and bossy. Use common sense; don't back down from any conclusion just because it contradicts what the higher-ups make you believe. What they preach and legislate is all based on make-believe.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

You need a brain.

Trash Talk

Your brain is mulch raked out of Liberal litter.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Of course, because you're an idiot.

The moron doesn't realize the comparison between the engines of the two vehicles is a lot like saying Oranges are really Tomatoes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The moron doesn't realize the comparison between the engines of the two vehicles is a lot like saying Oranges are really Tomatoes.

I haven't told him yet, but the SUV weighs over 4000 pounds
and the Model T is 1200-1600 pounds.

 

[Lastamender]

Can you say scam? I can.

 

[Sunsettommy]

I haven't told him yet, but the SUV weighs over 4000 pounds
and the Model T is 1200-1600 pounds.

There is another consideration he doesn't take into account.

 

[haveatit]

Of course, because you're an idiot.

You suck.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You suck.

Idiot says what?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

View attachment 654609

Can you say scam? I can.

OLD SCHOOL: Daniel Boone
NEW AGE: Boondoggle

 

[Crick]

1960's - Oil gone in 10 years
1970's - another ice age in 10 years
1980's - acid rain will destroy all craops in 10 years
1990's - The ozone layer will be destroyed in 10 years
2000's - the icecaps will be gone in 10 years
None happened, but all resulted in more taxes

All of these statements are hyperbolic exaggerations of what was actually being said at those times. that is to say, no serious scientists were warming of oil gone in ten years, and ice age in ten years or any of the rest Be that as it may:

The 1960's did see a reduced supply of oil which was greeted by expanded offshore exploration, exploration in the polar latitudes and large increases in automotive fuel efficiency. Additionally, gasoline prices have risen astronomically since that time. There were increases in oil subsidies which were, of course, funded by us taxpayers.

There was never any meaningful number of scientists in the 1970's or any other time that were concerned about an oncoming ice age and certainly not within ten years. There was certainly no tax increase associated with the nonsense in the media.

The concern about acid rain was quite real and was greeted by legislation to reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions. This took the form of a cap-and-trade system that reduced emissions faster than projected and at one-fourth the predicted cost. There were no general taxes created to solve this problem.

Ozone depletion was also quite real and led to the Montreal Protocol. The Protocol was quite effective and included a tariff on the import of ozone destroying materials. Were you or anyone you know importing ozone-destroying chemicals? I didn't think so.

The icecaps at the North and South poles as well as the Greenland ice cap have been shrinking at a dramatic pace for several decades now. No tax has been created to deal with it.

Perhaps they should have been.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There were increases in oil subsidies which were, of course, funded by us taxpayers.

Not really.

 

[KissMy]

You mean the BS that Carl Sagan came up with? LOL!
No thanks.

The bushfires that ravaged Australia in 2019 and 2020 were so massive, they actually cooled temperatures last year, researchers found. The counter intuitive effects came from massive amounts of aerosols and particulate matter the fires spewed into the atmosphere, making clouds more reflective of the sun’s rays

 

[Sunsettommy]

1960's - Oil gone in 10 years
1970's - another ice age in 10 years
1980's - acid rain will destroy all craops in 10 years
1990's - The ozone layer will be destroyed in 10 years
2000's - the icecaps will be gone in 10 years
None happened, but all resulted in more taxes

All of these statements are hyperbolic exaggerations of what was actually being said at those times. that is to say, no serious scientists were warming of oil gone in ten years, and ice age in ten years or any of the rest Be that as it may:

The 1960's did see a reduced supply of oil which was greeted by expanded offshore exploration, exploration in the polar latitudes and large increases in automotive fuel efficiency. Additionally, gasoline prices have risen astronomically since that time. There were increases in oil subsidies which were, of course, funded by us taxpayers.

There was never any meaningful number of scientists in the 1970's or any other time that were concerned about an oncoming ice age and certainly not within ten years. There was certainly no tax increase associated with the nonsense in the media.

The concern about acid rain was quite real and was greeted by legislation to reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions. This took the form of a cap-and-trade system that reduced emissions faster than projected and at one-fourth the predicted cost. There were no general taxes created to solve this problem.

Ozone depletion was also quite real and led to the Montreal Protocol. The Protocol was quite effective and included a tariff on the import of ozone destroying materials. Were you or anyone you know importing ozone-destroying chemicals? I didn't think so.

The icecaps at the North and South poles as well as the Greenland ice cap have been shrinking at a dramatic pace for several decades now. No tax has been created to deal with it.

Perhaps they should have been.

The ice loss is negligible compared to total mass and in reaction to warming from the LIA that had built them up just as it did with Glacier park Montana.

The melting at the West Antarctica region is partially caused by Volcanoes.

You exaggerate too much.

 

[KissMy]

Not really.

You Lie! - Oil companies transferred low profit oil & gas wells to shell companies, then bankrupted them so tax payers had to pay $billions of infrastructure dollars to oil companies to plug all those wells leaking methane into the air.

 

[ding]

You Lie! - Oil companies transferred low profit oil & gas wells to shell companies, then bankrupted them so tax payers had to pay $billions of infrastructure dollars to oil companies to plug all those wells leaking methane into the air.

Do you have an example of that that you can share?

 

[KissMy]

Do you have an example of that that you can share?

Escaping Liability​

The large company that drills a well often sells it to a midsize company that operates it for a while, then finally to someone who can “eke out the last few molecules,” said Environmental Defense Fund attorney Adam Peltz. “Really these end sales are about escaping the plugging liability.”

A tide of failing energy companies has government regulators racing to address the nation’s stockpile of abandoned, methane-leaking oil wells as environmental liabilities come to a head in oil and gas bankruptcy proceedings.

More than 260 domestic oil producers filed Chapter 11 over a six-year period marked by depressed commodity prices and the global economic shock caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the Senate last month would allocate more than $4 billion for plugging and remediating abandoned oil wells.

Who does the government pay for plugging and remediating abandoned oil wells??? They pay our tax money to the big oil companies who caused the disaster!

 

[ding]

Escaping Liability​

The large company that drills a well often sells it to a midsize company that operates it for a while, then finally to someone who can “eke out the last few molecules,” said Environmental Defense Fund attorney Adam Peltz. “Really these end sales are about escaping the plugging liability.”

A tide of failing energy companies has government regulators racing to address the nation’s stockpile of abandoned, methane-leaking oil wells as environmental liabilities come to a head in oil and gas bankruptcy proceedings.

More than 260 domestic oil producers filed Chapter 11 over a six-year period marked by depressed commodity prices and the global economic shock caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the Senate last month would allocate more than $4 billion for plugging and remediating abandoned oil wells.

Who does the government pay for plugging and remediating abandoned oil wells??? They pay our tax money to the big oil companies who caused the disaster!

Dude, that’s not making your case. Which companies created shell companies for the express purpose of going bankrupt to avoid P&A liabilities?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The bushfires that ravaged Australia in 2019 and 2020 were so massive, they actually cooled temperatures last year, researchers found. The counter intuitive effects came from massive amounts of aerosols and particulate matter the fires spewed into the atmosphere, making clouds more reflective of the sun’s rays

So did Mount Pinatubo.
And Krakatoa.
Nuclear winter was still a bullshit theory.